Can you give examples where sociology of the past has ever predicted modern social phenomena?

I have much better philosophy to read. So no thanks.

Well thats given Marx is science not philosophy

Pffff, nice one. He couldn't even be a good economist. And no, just calling your political/economic ideas "scientific" doesn't qualify them as such.

>. This, my lords, princes and statesmen, is where in your wisdom you have brought old Europe.
AND NOW YOU HAVE THE AUDACITY TO COME TO ME FOR HELP?

He points out how youre wrong so you just insult marx? Marx is at the very least important from a historical perspective

Sorry, but most of the reason why Marx is taken so seriously is because his cult of followers and admirers keep pushing him on everyone and everything.

He's the literal Millhouse of philosophy and political science. A fucking forced meme.

Whenever someone says "marx predicted this" I imagine the fellow in the picture stretching the marxist historical theory out like it was made of silly putty. "look look he predicted this too!"

Whenever someone posts a generic /pol/ image in reaction to arguments they don't like I imagine the fellow in the picture

Exactly.

Mertons strain theory is pretty fucking poignant when contemporary applications are considered.

the criticism of democracy in Republic holds up perfectly today tbqh

sup

not really sociology, but whatever

The whole of Marxism is predicated upon the idea that labour is the crux of it all. Yet it has no value anymore.

So Marx is irrelevant.
Just fucking stop it you nu males.

Richard Rorty, although not a sociologist, predicted the Trump candidacy and the alt-right back in 1998. Long quote:

Many writers on socioeconomic policy have warned that the old industrialized democracies are heading into a Weimar-like period, one in which populist movements are likely to overturn constitutional governments. Edward Luttwak, for example, has suggested that fascism may be the American future. The point of his book The Endangered American Dream is that members of labor unions, and unorganized unskilled workers, will sooner or later realize that their government is not even trying to prevent wages from sinking or to prevent jobs from being exported. Around the same time, they will realize that suburban white-collar workers—themselves desperately afraid of being downsized—are not going to let themselves be taxed to provide social benefits for anyone else.

At that point, something will crack. The nonsuburban electorate will decide that the system has failed and start looking around for a strongman to vote for—someone willing to assure them that, once he is elected, the smug bureaucrats, tricky lawyers, overpaid bond salesmen, and postmodernist professors will no longer be calling the shots. A scenario like that of Sinclair Lewis’ novel It Can’t Happen Here may then be played out. For once a strongman takes office, nobody can predict what will happen. In 1932, most of the predictions made about what would happen if Hindenburg named Hitler chancellor were wildly overoptimistic.

One thing that is very likely to happen is that the gains made in the past forty years by black and brown Americans, and by homosexuals, will be wiped out. Jocular contempt for women will come back into fashion. The words “nigger” and “kike” will once again be heard in the workplace. All the sadism which the academic Left has tried to make unacceptable to its students will come flooding back. All the resentment which badly educated Americans feel about having their manners dictated to them by college graduates will find an outlet.

truthdig.com/report/item/the_revenge_of_the_lower_classes_and_the_rise_of_american_fascism_20160302

brutal

dam. Thats brilliant. Shame the proleteriat's victory was such a dissapointment and was accompanied by even more death.

Heine sort of predicted nazi Germany's and their bloodlust, Im on my phone, can someone post the quote

>In 1834, 99 years before Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party seized power in Germany, Heine wrote in his work "The History of Religion and Philosophy in Germany":
>"Christianity – and that is its greatest merit – has somewhat mitigated that brutal Germanic love of war, but it could not destroy it. Should that subduing talisman, the cross, be shattered, the frenzied madness of the ancient warriors, that insane Berserk rage of which Nordic bards have spoken and sung so often, will once more burst into flame. This talisman is fragile, and the day will come when it will collapse miserably. Then the ancient stony gods will rise from the forgotten debris and rub the dust of a thousand years from their eyes, and finally Thor with his giant hammer will jump up and smash the Gothic cathedrals. (...)
>"Do not smile at my advice – the advice of a dreamer who warns you against Kantians, Fichteans, and philosophers of nature. Do not smile at the visionary who anticipates the same revolution in the realm of the visible as has taken place in the spiritual. Thought precedes action as lightning precedes thunder. German thunder is of true Germanic character; it is not very nimble, but rumbles along ponderously. Yet, it will come and when you hear a crashing such as never before has been heard in the world's history, then you know that the German thunderbolt has fallen at last. At that uproar the eagles of the air will drop dead, and lions in the remotest deserts of Africa will hide in their royal dens. A play will be performed in Germany which will make the French Revolution look like an innocent idyll."
>Heine also wrote in his 1820-1821 play Almansor the famous admonition, "Dort, wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man am Ende auch Menschen": "Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people." - a powerful prophesy of the Nazi book burning.

>Spengler admits that in his era money has already won, in the form of democracy. But in destroying the old elements of the Culture, it prepares the way for the rise of a new and overpowering figure: the Caesar. Before such a leader, money collapses, and in the Imperial Age the politics of money fades away
>Some, such as Amaury de Riencourt in The Coming Caesars, maintain that Spengler's predictions have been borne out as the United States has pushed aside the other powers of the West and established a Pax Americana. De Reincourt's work suggested that the United States would enter its Caesarian phase in the 1990s. They also point to trends in arts and philosophy.
>On the other hand, it has been argued that Spengler believed that the West's final, "Caesaristic" phase was destined to be fulfilled under German domination;[18] Germany's defeat in the two World Wars has therefore prevented that transition from taking place. Spengler did warn that Hitler was not the right man to guide Europe into the preliminary stages of Caesarism; he thought that Hitler would badly mishandle the whole process.[19]

Robert Michels proposed the iron law of oligarchy to argue that "true democracy" is effectively impossible because all organizations stand under constraints which lead to power and influence being concentrated in the hands of a few.

Aristotle proposed that government regimes tend to follow a cycle: from monarchical, to aristocratic, to democratic, to tyrannical. He based this on a study of the hundreds of Greek city-states of his day and their history.

Volkmar Weiss argued similarly, that eugenic and dysgenic phases of population growth lead to their eventual collapse.

Joseph Tainter argues something related to this, which is that the ceaseless growth of complexity in society eventually creates more costs than the society is capable of managing, and it reverts to a simpler form after collapsing.

Some of the Founding Fathers of the US thought that a two-party system would inevitably form.

Not sure if this is exactly what OP is looking for, but these are conclusions and predictions which could be considered sociological in nature.

So, the rise of the white man?

Sir John Glubb, a 20th century British historian, did a historical survey which he compared to our own present conditions, and found numerous parallels. There are too many good sections worth quoting in full, you really should just read his essay which is only 26 pages but full of valuable info. It's as brutal and accurate as the Rorty quote above.

people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf

>the rise of the white man

lol no

This is the end. Whites will get displaced by Chinese, who will eventually be displaced by AI anyway.

>Proletariat own the MOP
See! Just as Marx predicted!
>Proletariat don't own the MOP
See! Just as Marx predicted!

>one in which populist movements are likely to overturn constitutional governments.
Who is FDR? (Tried to thwart congress in various instances, hid things from them in others, some of his executive initiatives were later ruled unconstitutional, tried to pack SCOTUS, lauded by Mussolini.)

> that members of labor unions, and unorganized unskilled workers, will sooner or later realize that their government is not even trying to prevent wages from sinking or to prevent jobs from being exported. Around the same time, they will realize that suburban white-collar workers—themselves desperately afraid of being downsized—are not going to let themselves be taxed to provide social benefits for anyone else.

I think he hit the nail on the head here.

>At that point, something will crack. The nonsuburban electorate will decide that the system has failed and start looking around for a strongman to vote for—someone willing to assure them that, once he is elected, the smug bureaucrats, tricky lawyers, overpaid bond salesmen, and postmodernist professors will no longer be calling the shots.

We're in somewhat of agreement here. Though this end result could be Andrew Jackson. It could be TR. It could be Reagan. It could be Ross Perot. It could be Trump. It could be Hitler. It could be Churchill, De Gaulle, or Lenin or Stalin or Tito. This is not a dynamic that points to one person, or even one ideology.

>A scenario like that of Sinclair Lewis’ novel It Can’t Happen Here may then be played out.
Now we may be hyperbolizing a bit.

> For once a strongman takes office, nobody can predict what will happen. In 1932, most of the predictions made about what would happen if Hindenburg named Hitler chancellor were wildly overoptimistic.

While predictions of other 'strong men' like FDR were pessimistic.

>One thing that is very likely to happen is that the gains made
>Positive Rights
Into thee trash it goes.

>by black and brown Americans
Egalitarianism is a failed premise; integration and mass immigration failed programs.

>by homosexuals
Homosexual here. Obergefell's majority opinion was one was of the worst reasoned in the history of the SCOTUS.

>Jocular contempt for women will come back into fashion.
>The words “nigger” and “kike” will once again be heard in the workplace.
The horror.

> All the sadism which the academic Left has tried to make unacceptable to its students will come flooding back.
Micro-aggression theory is based on failed premises and thin skin. Campus safe spaces are despicable to the free association of people and free transmission of ideas.

> All the resentment which badly educated Americans feel about having their manners dictated to them by college graduates will find an outlet.
Do we in the technical, business, scientific, and mathematical fields fall on the former half of your badly educated/dictating college graduates dichotomy? Do you want Sociologists dictating the ins and outs of social life?

So hes not important in the history of ideas... because hes so popular and influential?

The proletariat has simply shifted to the third world in a globalist economy.

Marx was right about many things btw, he was wrong about many, but so are all thinkers.

He could still be right anyway about the eventual revolution, he might have just had the wrong timeframe.

Chinese are AI. Ashkenazi master race.

Jesus Christ, you're an idiot.

did you just claim that labor no longer has any value

>waah sjw's always talk about marx so marx most be shit
you are retarded, you are exactly like the kind of people who dont read nietzsche and/or shit on him because the nazi bastardized his ideas.
you too

I don't think I've ever read a more retarded post
Why do we let gays on here?

no reason not to

That user's post is reason enough

You are so much better

>All the sadism which the academic Left has tried to make unacceptable to its students will come flooding back. All the resentment which badly educated Americans feel about having their manners dictated to them by college graduates will find an outlet.

To be fair, that is exactly what they deserve.

that's unsettlingly accurate

>You said ideas that piss me off so I'm going to fucking kill you

>ideas remain nothing more than ideas
These ideas go on to have major effects on society and policy, and the academic class is often immune to the full extent of their effects.

The poor and poorly educated of this country deserve the academic class down a few pegs just as the these intellectuals have tried to deconstruct them and strip them of their dignity in he process. Worst of all the academic class acts as if it's doing them a favor. their resentment is more than justified.

>>These ideas go on to have major effects on society and policy, and the academic class is often immune to the full extent of their effects.

We can't have people say dude honestly stop yelling because what if they get me to stop yelling

What exactly do mean by that?

If by telling someone to stop yelling you mean stripping them of their dignity and thrusting them into a lifetime of nihilism, then you're on the right track. If that's not what you meant, you don't understand their intentions and the effects their work has on the world as a whole.

Is there any period of history where the working class isn't pissed off? It's basically a priori knowledge at this point

I don't think that's what a priori means

>>If by telling someone to stop yelling you mean stripping them of their dignity and thrusting them into a lifetime of nihilism

What dignity do you have by constantly finding new ways to be outraged because of the internet. You're becoming an attention starved beggar waiting for the next big thing to happen, and being called mean names pisses you off.

If you aren't being used to being called mean shit and want to start a revolution over it be my guest, but you won't be satisfied with the rightist populist outcome. That just targets you for being weak.

Here. What counterpoints of mine do you find objectionable, or you want me to elaborate on?
>Idiot
>Retarded

Your rebuttals sure resulted in neurological processing and trasmission of electro-chemical signals.

Rorty is dead, dude. Who are you replying to?

Social phenomena hasn't changed.

>You said ideas that piss me off so I'm going to fucking kill you

Tbh, given the amount of hatred being pushed on university campuses, somebody is going to pick up a gun some day.

And when some purple-haired genderqueer feminist shoots his or her dean for being a "fascist" or a "white supremacist", we're gonna hear people like you defend the motive as something else, just like people completely shifted the motive of the black guy who assassinated police officers not too long ago.

>And when some purple-haired genderqueer feminist shoots his or her dean for being a "fascist" or a "white supremacist", we're gonna hear people like you defend the motive as something else, just like people completely shifted the motive of the black guy who assassinated police officers not too long ago.

People always say this stuff about all this politically correct bullshit on university campuses, but I myself have never witnessed it. It makes me wonder if the people who keep saying this shit really have attended university in the last 20 years, or not.

Perhaps I just don't live in the right country/area/go to the right university.

Or maybe you study Physics in a department that is mostly shielded from it.

It's pretty clear that it happens, or people wouldn't be talking about it.

I study humanities.

Sometimes i think it's a boogeyman argument. My university's pretty out of the way though.

>It's pretty clear that it happens, or people wouldn't be talking about it.
>Everything people assume happens must be true. People's fears and boogeymen are always true.

I think it's more likely that you aren't paying attention.

It takes you literally 5 seconds to write the words "SJW college" in Youtube, and you can see all manner of insanity.

>Perhaps I just don't live in the right country/area/go to the right university.

I'd say it's somewhat limited to Anglo countries (and maybe some more Americanized ones like Sweden).

It's certainly overblown by its "opponents" online, who are often just as childish as the SJWs (see: gamergate).

>I'd say it's somewhat limited to Anglo countries (and maybe some more Americanized ones like Sweden).

I live in Australia. Is it supposed to be a thing here as well? Not only have I not really come across it, but I've never come across anyone talk about it in person. I suppose it's just not a thing here.

It's a 100% american thing

>It's certainly overblown by its "opponents" online

lol

It definitely is, especially in the major cities like Melbourne.

Metal Gear Solid 2: The Sons of Liberty

Damn.Should I just fucking switch to anthropology so at least it sounds cool when peole ask what I'm studying?

Help gaiz

Everyone is an ametuer sociologist. We've all had insights into life and people and growth and change. Anyone who's read through the psychologists of the 20th century is familiar with a thousand ways that people have used ambiguous and interchangeable terminology to frame or highlight commonalities and trends in thought and behavior but more or less always failed to quantify the psyche or it's limits, capacities, or implications.

>I think he hit the nail on the head

>Person 2 quotes, agrees with, and summarizes person 1

>Person 2 analyzes person 1 in the context of current events

>Le Trump is literally-- and I mean literally-- Hitler

>Respond to person 2

>Lel why you respond to dead man?

Apologies. I'm like a newborn on Veeky Forums, not having been on this board for a year or so. Is everyone here like this?

Oh, look at the irony. A guy who claims people don't read other people because of their (in)famy, and not only have I read Nietzsche, I've also given Marx a chance by reading the Manifesto. I won't waste my time with him because his ideas aren't worth it. Sorry if it hurts your proletariat feels, but Spinoza, Hegel, Plato, Aristotle, Hume, Locke, Smith, Nietzsche, Descartes, Leibniz, the presocratics, and others will actually teach me something about the world.

Not that guy, and not even a Marxist, but you should definitely read him, for no other reason than his influence and his defining of the terms of debate. I mean dialectical materialism is still an accepted view of politics/history

Hmmm, I see. Maybe I'll give him a chance sometime. Any recommendations?

Literally everything is wrong

That's pure confirmation bias
I go to berkeley and the worst I've seen is some guy barking about global warming every day. There's a republican group that openly supports trump that hasn't been taken down or anything

Academics "barking" about a relevant problem? Color me shocked?

Also is talking about global warming social justice warrior now. Can we not talk about that without you autistic screaming and tearing your hair off your taint

I'm pretty sure he's a homeless guy. He stands on a little pedestal in the courtyard every day and tells at people. And by barking I mean like a carnival barker

His worry is completely justified imho

t. classcuck /pol/ster

Not the guy you're responding to, but all volumes of Capital, with explanatory or supplementary material of need be.

I'm a marginalist, but understand how the entire questions of value, production, labor, wealth, and capital can be viewed through a metaphysical lens.

See
I also find it interesting how the Marxist-Leninists, An Coms and MIMists are pulling their hair over the Left's new definitions of class.

>Class only or mainly relates to peoples' relationships to the MOP! Bourgeoisie ! Petty bourgeoisie! Proletarian! Peasant!

That's close minded and non-intersectionalist of you, Comrade.You're ignoring systemic compounded domination and oppression of certain groups by others, outside of economics, and how they be expressed.

>We are not comrades!

Don't trigger me.

(I may troll leftypol with a comic/macro similar to the one in which the gay male responds to various other people representing sexes, genders, and sexualities. )

Which definition of "class" are you using?

*proletariat
Polite email-field-inputted function
From what I have heard, it's mostly centered around Melbourne in specific and Victoria in general.